Preview — The English Constitution by Walter Bagehot

The English Constitution

'An ancient and ever-altering constitution is like an old man who still wears with attached fondness clothes in the fashion of his youth: what you see of him is the same; what you do not see is wholly altered.' Walter Bagehot's The English Constitution (1867) is the best account of the history and working of the British political system ever written. As arguments raged in'An ancient and ever-altering constitution is like an old man who still wears with attached fondness clothes in the fashion of his youth: what you see of him is the same; what you do not see is wholly altered.' Walter Bagehot's The English Constitution (1867) is the best account of the history and working of the British political system ever written. As arguments raged in mid-Victorian Britain about giving the working man the vote, and democracies overseas were pitched into despotism and civil war, Bagehot took a long, cool look at the 'dignified' and 'efficient' elements which made the English system the envy of the world. His analysis of the monarchy, the role of the prime minister and cabinet, and comparisons with the American presidential system are astute and timeless, and pertinent to current discussions surrounding devolution and electoral reform. Combining the wit and panache of a journalist with the wisdom of a man of letters steeped in evolutionary ideas and historical knowledge, Bagehot produced a book which is always thoughtful, often funny, and seldom dull.This edition reproduces Bagehot's original 1867 work in full, and introduces the reader to the dramatic political events that surrounded its publication....more

Paperback, 219 pages

Published
May 1st 2009
by Oxford University Press, USA
(first published 1867)

Community Reviews

Walter Bagehot (1826 - 1877) first wrote The English Constitution in a series of articles to the Fortnightly Review between May 1865 and January 1867. It was a turbulent period in British politics: the great barrier to reform, the Prime Minister Lord Palmerston, died in October 1865, and thus opened the way for a realistic chance of enfranchising the working class. The Liberal MP W. E. Gladstone's somewhat modest Reform Bill failed to pass Parliament in 1866, and the Reform League's mass meetingWalter Bagehot (1826 - 1877) first wrote The English Constitution in a series of articles to the Fortnightly Review between May 1865 and January 1867. It was a turbulent period in British politics: the great barrier to reform, the Prime Minister Lord Palmerston, died in October 1865, and thus opened the way for a realistic chance of enfranchising the working class. The Liberal MP W. E. Gladstone's somewhat modest Reform Bill failed to pass Parliament in 1866, and the Reform League's mass meetings shocked respectable opinion.

Bagehot made minor adjustments to the articles before publishing them together in book-form as The English Constitution. His deft and perceptive analysis of the Cabinet, the Monarchy, the House of Lords, the House of Commons, and the checks and balances of the Constitution, has the reputation of a classic even though the Constitution he described was substantially changed by Benjamin Disraeli's Reform Act less than a year after it was published. The reason for this book's enduring popularity is that Bagehot does not refer to the minutiae of case law or Acts of Parliament, but is much more informal: one reviewer said the book was "wise chat".

Britain does not have a codified constitution like that of the United States or France, and so explaining the English Constitution accurately often eluded those who tried. Bagehot offers the interpretation that the Constitution possessed two parts: the dignified and the efficient. The dignified components were the monarchy and (to an extent) the House of Lords; the efficient were the Cabinet and the House of Commons. The efficient parts of the Constitution initiated change whilst the dignified parts of the Constitution gave change legitimacy in the eyes of the people by covering it in a ceremonial gloss.

Bagehot was writing soon after the American Civil War, and this book is peppered with criticisms of the United States' Constitution. The British Cabinet was not wholly executive or legislative but was a mixture of both: it contained ministers of the Crown and was answerable to the House of Commons, and thereby avoided the impasse American Presidents and the United States Congress often found themselves in.

Bagehot coined the famous dictum that the constitutional monarch had three rights: "the right to be consulted, the right to encourage, the right to warn" (p. 64). Britain is in essence a crowned republic, although the monarchy has a powerful aura that beguiles the uneducated populace. Living in an age where only a minority of the population were educated, Bagehot believed that monarchy served a useful function in that it made government intelligible to the masses (p. 41). Of course this argument has today been overtaken by events, as has his claim that the people supported monarchy because they ruled by God's grace, which is no longer true in our post-Christian age (pp. 41-42).

Bagehot was a journalist and so knew how to both keep the reader interested whilst at the same time still managing to follow through a line of argument. It is easy to follow his reasoning due to the clear (but never dull) narrative. He was a literary master stylist.

This Oxford World's Classics text follows the 1867 first edition. The text used in Bagehot's collected works (1915 and 1974) and the original World's Classics edition of 1928 used Bagehot's 1872 second edition of the book, in which he substantially altered the text (most notably in expunging his criticisms of lowering the franchise). If you would like to read this version I would recommend Richard Crossman's edition.

Although dealing with political events immediately after this book was first published, Maurice Cowling's 1867: Disraeli, Gladstone and Revolution offers a brilliant examination of 1860s British high politics. Bagehot has been well served in his biographers: Alastair Buchan's "The Spare Chancellor" and Norman St John Stevas' "Walter Bagehot" both being excellent works. ...more

A study of the English constitution from more than a century ago, yet is still a pertinent and interesting book today. The book is divided into essays on sections of the constitution and the government that it defines. The journalistic nature of the writing along with its high quality combine to make this a pleasant read. The political analysis is sharp and the opinions are timeless.

Much better than a dull textbook. This book reads like the Economist would, if the Economist was to describe the workings of the English Constitution. Just as well, as the author was the editor of that esteemed magazine. Obviously out of date (by at least 100 years) but it makes up for in readability what it lacks in precision.